This comment was left on my site by a fellow who called himself “Apologist for Zionism”. He makes some very interesting points on here. We have dealt with his notion that every ethnic group deserves a state on this blog previously. Non-territorial nations certainly do not deserve a state at all, unless someone wants to donate one to them.

These comments are interesting because in many ways they are straight of out of Theodor Herzl himself. Herzl has been accused by anti-Zionists of being a Jewish anti-Semite, and he was a serious critic of the Jews. He felt that Jews and Gentiles could not live together and he felt that the fault was equally divided between the two groups.

He originally favored Jewish assimilation, but after the Dreyfus Affair in France in the late 1800’s (this shocked many people because they thought that anti-Semitism in France was history by this time) he changed his mind and figured that the only way forward was for Jews and Gentiles to live in permanent separation.

He noted that when Jews did well, they become very successful businessmen and aroused the envy and wrath of the Gentiles, and when they sank into poverty, they bred radicals like rabbits.

When we sink, we become a revolutionary proletariat, the subordinate officers of all revolutionary parties; and at the same time, when we rise, there rises also our terrible power of the purse. Herzl, Der Judenstaat, 1896, p.91.

The commenter points out that many early Zionists were socialists who felt that one of the problems of the Jew was that he had gotten out of touch with the land itself (however, Jews were forbidden to own land for most of their stay in Europe). To cure this defect, these socialist Zionists supported a sort of back to the land thing that would get Jews’ hands dirty and make them into salt of the Earth again.

The question of whether or not nations have carrying capacities for Jews is most interesting, but I don’t even want to go there. The author suggests that the US is presently reaching such a capacity.

Another very successful minority similar to Jews is the Overseas Chinese. There have been some pogroms against the Overseas Chinese, but it’s nothing compared to what Jews have been through. Only about 3% of the population, they control about ~70% of the economies of, say, the Philippines and Indonesia.

Now, no group of people, no matter how kind-hearted or progressive, is going to put up with that kind of bullshit for long, and there is no way that the Overseas Chinese work 23 times harder or are 23 times smarter than Indonesians or Filipinos. At the outside, perhaps they are 3.5 times more intelligent than Indonesians or Filipinos. This would entitle them, with 3% of the population, to ~10% of the wealth, not an insane 70%.

The problem with capitalism is that in amasses such insane fortunes in the hands of small groups who frankly have not earned it due to either their genes or their harder work. In so doing, capitalism virtually guarantees endless racial conflict.

There are differences between Jews and Overseas Chinese. The Overseas Chinese tend to keep their heads down, keep out of politics, and are not endlessly meddling in the cultural and political affairs of the nation – they just focus on making money. Jews focus on making money too, but they can’t seem to help trying to change society, a habit that arouses mountains of anti-Semitism.

This is an interesting comment:

In fact, some theorists and historians even believe that it was the general emancipation of the Jews in the early-to-mid 19th Century that led to the Industrial Revolution in The West and the consequent rise of modern industrial-capitalism, which Jews also played and still played a large part in.The countries in Europe where Jews had the most political and economic freedom, especially England and Germany, were also the first to industrialize on a large scale…coincidence?

That paragraph is most interesting, and led another commenter to rebut that Jews were never a part of industrialization in Germany and Britain; instead they were associated in Britain anyway with finance capital. The commenter then said he was reading a book by a guy named William Engdahl, A Century of War.

Engdahl is no anti-Semite, but he felt that the predominance of finance capital in Britain led to colonial adventures instead of building up domestic industry, to the eventual detriment of Britain. He then noted that in the 1920’s and 1930’s, German products were said to be better than British products.

I don’t know about Jewish emancipation leading to the Industrial Revolution in Britain and Germany, but I believe that Jews played an essential role in the development of capitalism itself.

I also don’t agree with the “German socialist” viewpoint that Hitler later picked up – along with Israel Shamir – that the Jews are a virus-like people, a race of rootless cosmopolitans without ties to the blood and soil and without loyalty to the nation, as the German capitalists supposedly had.

It’s my understanding that in the 1920’s, many top German capitalists, including factory owners, were Jews. Jews are now heavily involved in industry here in the US. Jews do not limit themselves anymore to finance capital, and they are not very big players in it anymore anyway, as it all seems to be taken over by multinational banks in the US, Europe and Asia with few to no Jewish connections.

The role of the Jews in finance capital in the past was quite large (they almost controlled European banking from ~1850-1930 or so).

The big players in the UK 110 years ago were not Jews but a couple of cabals, one centered around a man named Cecil Rhodes. This cabal also had ties to top UK universities like Oxford and Cambridge.

They went to the top boys schools like Eaton. They were active in colonialism and in groups such as the Oriental Society. They actually formed secret societies. It’s true that Lord Rothschild was a member (at the periphery) of one of these secret societies, but he seems to have been the only Jew.

I really doubt that the dominance of finance capital (= Jewish money) in the UK 110 years ago is what led to colonial adventures. This group centered around Rhodes was very much into colonialism, and Britain was a huge industrial power in those days, mostly due to her Navy and her colonies.

Britain ruled the world from 1588 (the defeat of the Spanish Armada – and also the first stirrings of English nationalism – one of the first manifestations of classic European nationalism) all the way up until about 1935, when air power, notably German, successfully challenged British sea and colonial power.

German products have always been better than British products, especially fine machinery. I doubt the superiority of German fine machined products over such British products has much to do with Jewish money. There was plenty of Jewish money floating around Germany around that time too.

This cabal around Rhodes, I believe, continues to run The London Times to this very day, or at least they did in the mid 1960’s.

At this point, the Jews are in Israel and they are not leaving. Radical Palestinians want to throw out every Jew who came after 1916 (The Balfour Declaration was in 1917). As a settler-colonist myself whose ancestors were still stealing Indian land for our settler-colonial project as late as 1873 in California (see Modoc Wars), this sort of thing makes me really uneasy.

Any settlement to the conflict in the Holy Land must take into account the safety of the Jews already there. I would hate to see a situation similar to Iraq where maniacal insurgents are running around slaughtering Jews at will and setting off car bombs and killing 100-200 Jews at a time. Arabs are Arabs, and I don’t think Palestinians and Iraqis are all that different, except one comes from the Levant and the other from Mesopotamia.

I’m also not sure that Jewish-led industrialization in Germany (assuming it is a fact) led to the alienation and impoverishment of the rural people and the rise of Nazi blood and soil German ethnic nationalism, but it’s a complicated question to be sure. The followers of the Nazis were mostly petit bourgeois, lower middle class office workers and the like. Rural dwellers were not so supportive.

Zionist Apologist writes:

Every ethnic group has a right to a state. It’s a shame that the Jews had to steal Israel, but at least they have a place to call home now. Imperialism is unfortunately a part of humanity’s dark history – and we now have to deal with the dark consequences.

A homeland for Jews (whether in Israel or wherever else) is the ONLY WAY to ‘heal’ the Jews, and it’ll take many generations. I’m sure you’ve heard the oft-repeated phrase [paraphrasing]: “Diaspora is the disease, and Israel is the cure.”

The Zionists were considering places like Uganda or Argentina early on, and places like those would have been a better choice than Israel in the long run since the Jews would have then been able to develop an agricultural base economy, which is the root of a settled and stable nation-state.

However, those places were very rural and undeveloped and hence probably wouldn’t have been successful (as the Jews saw many of their ‘agricultural colony’ experiments in Argentina and Africa and the USA and Canada collapse in dismal failure).

I have noticed that Ashkenazi Jews have a definite inability to settle anywhere in any substantial numbers that hasn’t already been fairly heavily settled or where they don’t have access to a nearby network of fellow Jews.

It is telling as well that the early Zionist ideals of hard work, agricultural and manual labor, and other mainstays of key Zionist doctrines are now being filled by imported (!) labor (often Asian or Arab) since so many Israelis ‘dislike’ that kind of work and all want to be lawyers and doctors and professors and journalists and bankers (surprise, surprise) rather than just another cog in Israeli society.

Israel is even having problems with their military draft now. But, you see, THE WHOLE POINT of the Zionist experiment was for Jews to become cogs in a stable Jewish society instead of always being the perpetual Jewish ‘Other’ in the societies of foreign peoples.

The Zionists also noticed that sometimes Jews tended to take advantage of often-times gullible non-Jewish peoples because of their general intelligence and capacity to facilitate commerce, and they wanted to fix that too.

In fact, some theorists and historians even believe that it was the general emancipation of the Jews in the early-to-mid 19th Century that led to the Industrial Revolution in The West and the consequent rise of modern industrial-capitalism, which Jews also played and still played a large part in.

The countries in Europe where Jews had the most political and economic freedom, especially England and Germany, were also the first to industrialize on a large scale…coincidence?

The problem with this, though, is that this Jewish-inspired industrialization tended to slowly choke the lifestyle and economic systems of the rural/agrarian people of those countries who obviously weren’t Jews, thus leading to resentment (antisemitism) – hence the Nazi doctrine of “blood and soil” and their desire to eventually resurrect the German peasantry in the Slavic lands of Eastern Europe.

I have also noticed that every nation has a sort of Jewish ‘carrying capacity,’ i.e. it is unable to manage, hold, or absorb Jews in very large numbers until antisemitism starts to break out (for instance, history shows that antisemitism in Germany grew very quickly as more and more Jews from Eastern Europe fled to Germany and Western Europe trying to escape poverty or antisemitism or whatever).

And in some ways I think that the saturation point may be close to being reached in North America.I must say that an island nation might actually be best for Jews, as long as it could be mostly self sufficient. As Ezra Pound once said in one of his infamous WWII radio broadcasts: “Sell ‘em Australia.”

72 responses to “An Apologetics For Zionism”

“Now, no group of people, no matter how kind-hearted or progressive, is going to put up with that kind of bullshit for long, and there is no way that the Overseas Chinese work 23 times harder or are 23 times smarter than Indonesians or Filipinos. At the outside, perhaps they are 3.5 times more intelligent than Indonesians or Filipinos. This would entitle them, with 3% of the population, to ~10% of the wealth, not an insane 70%.”

It depends on network effects or the architecture of the network as well as individual differences in smarts.

For example if one computer is 3x faster than another, then it has 3x the value. But 5 3x faster computers in network work not 3x faster or 15x faster, but 3 to the 5 power faster (243x) under proper configuration. If the Chinese in the Philippines were optimized, they would make 243x more than the average Philippino.

The Chinese have 3% of the population. Run the numbers and per capita each Chinese outearns the Philippino about 100 to 1. What this tells you is that the Chinese are pretty closed to optimized and must be largely excluding Philippinos from the Chinese portion of the economy. Do the Chinese have a “right” to that difference? If they created it and the flips don’t care, they do.

Jews started the Industrial Rev? Really? They’re the chosen people, God’s a Jew, so is His Kid, and Adam and Eve were Jews. The world will end with everyone fighting over Jew-Land. They are just that important! Is there anything else they are responsible for that we should know about? I think I don’t wanna know…
Seriously- Jews didn’t start the Industrial Rev- It was fueled by (gentile) inventors. The Jews in England and Germany merely supplied the…guess what? If you said MONEY, you win an all-expenses paid one-way ticket to Tel Aviv (or Palm Springs)!

GSG- Well, I don’t consider myself a Judaophile or an anti-Semite. Jews are only “central to humanity” because of Christianity. And capitalism. If the early Christian church hadn’t given Jews the usury concession, they would be just a minor, albeit high-acheiving, ethno-religious group, with a lot less enmity directed towards them. They gave us a lot of good comedians, Dylan and The Ramones, and the H-Bomb. And Uncle Karl, of course.

Gay Area Guy
Depending on who I’m with I can morph from Judeocentric to a self hatering. When I am with obnoxious jews who only care about jewish related things and Israel, I become a self hater. When I come across antisemites or ethnocentric arabs online, I tend to defend jews and bash arabs.

A U.S. soldier is demonstrating DDT-hand spraying equipment. DDT was used to control the spread of typhus-carrying lice.

DDT = Zyklon-B

Gassing US army style_

Epidemics occurred routinely throughout Europe from the 16th to the 19th centuries, and occurred during the English Civil War, the Thirty Years’ War and the Napoleonic Wars. In the Thirty Years’ War, an estimated 8 million Germans were wiped out by bubonic plague and typhus fever.[6].

During Napoleon’s retreat from Moscow in 1812, more French soldiers died of typhus than were killed by the Russians.[7]

A major epidemic occurred in Ireland between 1816–19, during the famine caused by a world wide reduction in temperature known as the Year Without a Summer. It is estimated that 100,000 Irish perished. Typhus appeared again in the late 1830s, and yet another major typhus epidemic occurred during the Great Irish Famine between 1846 and 1849. The Irish typhus spread to England, where it was sometimes called “Irish fever” and was noted for its virulence. It killed people of all social classes as lice were endemic and inescapable, but it hit particularly hard in the lower or “unwashed” social strata.

In America, a typhus epidemic killed the son of Franklin Pierce in Concord, New Hampshire in 1843 and struck in Philadelphia in 1837. Several epidemics occurred in Baltimore, Memphis and Washington DC between 1865 and 1873. Typhus was also a significant killer during the US Civil War, although typhoid fever was the more prevalent cause of US Civil War “camp fever”. Typhoid fever, caused by Salmonella, is a completely different disease from typhus (see chart below).

During World War I typhus caused three million deaths in Russia and more in Poland and Romania.[8] De-lousing stations were established for troops on the Western front but the disease ravaged the armies of the Eastern front, with over 150,000 dying in Serbia alone. Fatalities were generally between 10 to 40 percent of those infected, and the disease was a major cause of death for those nursing the sick. Between 1918 and 1922 typhus caused at least 3 million deaths out of 20–30 million cases. In Russia after World War I, during the civil war between the White and Red armies, typhus killed three million, largely civilians. Even larger epidemics in the post-war chaos of Europe were only averted by the widespread use of the newly discovered DDT to kill the lice on millions of refugees and displaced persons.-/b>

DISEASE HAS MOVED hand-in-hand with warfare and migrations throughout history, and has brought more than one army to its knees. Eastern Europe was a particularly dreaded location for such epidemics: the Allies in the Crimean War, and the Napoleonic Army in 1812 were decimated by diseases, above all typhus and cholera, but also typhoid and dysentery.82 For a long time the cause of these diseases was unknown, only towards the end of the 19th Century was it understood that cholera, typhoid, and dysentery were transmitted by microbes usually in contaminated water.83 The vector of typhus — the body louse — was not identified until shortly before World War One.84

This lack of understanding did not prevent Europeans from attempting to control these diseases, since the general understanding was that filth and poor hygiene had something to do with their transmission.85

Towards the end of the 19th Century Germany developed a number of procedures for the delousing and disinfection of people and their clothing. These involved showering, smearing the body with petroleum or other substances to kill bugs, and steaming or boiling belongings.86 The application of the these procedures soon came to a test in the 1880’s.

Most American Jews have a Europid phenotype. Some Jews would like to distance themselves from whites, but the problem is that nobody who isn’t white sees Jews as anything other than white. It’s like Irish Catholics fighting English Protestants. To outsiders, like Blacks and Asians, our pale, big-nosed faces all look the same.

Considering that most Jews are irreligious, it’s a matter of preserving one’s own hide and that of their children. Jews prosper or perish–as whites. There is no alternative.

I have to take a different position from Robert on hopes for peaceful co-existence between the Jews and Palestinians. I felt the way he did earlier in my life. But after Israel elected Ariel Sharon, invaded Lebanon, and killed peace activists like Rachel Corrie and those aid/humanitarian activists on their way to Gaza, I hope the Palestinians, who will beat and outnumber the Israelis (possibly after I’m in the big sleep) will not deal with the minority zionists kindly. When I say that I consider the Israelis to be similar to fascists and Nazis, I mean it. I wouldn’t give a flying chit if the Nazis had to go into the liberated concentration camps and see what they wrought, or labor 12 hrs a day to dispose of the mountains of bodies, and I feel the same way about the Israeli zionists. After the WW2 was over, the German people were forceably ejected from the occupied territories and a million or more died in the transfer, and for 3 yrs afterwards in Germany about 3 million more died from sub-ration malnourishment and disease. American military even chased Germans out of dumpsters when they were looking for discarded scraps. You don’t see anyone agonizing over this fact, in fact you rarely see this fact discussed at all.
Why should the zionists get more empathy?
I don’t care how the Palestinians treat the Israelis when they get the upper hand. If I’m still alive and the Amerian or Euro media wring their hands or decry the inhumanity of the poor Jews treatment at the hands of those “barbarous Muslims” I’m going to scoff and grab my crotch.
Payback’s a MF’er, ain’t it?

It depends who you referring to by “fascist zionists.” If you believe that young Israelis should pay for the sins of previous generations.

“After the WW2 was over, the German people were forceably ejected from the occupied territories and a million or more died in the transfer, and for 3 yrs afterwards in Germany about 3 million more died from sub-ration malnourishment and disease. American military even chased Germans out of dumpsters when they were looking for discarded scraps. You don’t see anyone agonizing over this fact, in fact you rarely see this fact discussed at all.”

Two wrongs don’t make a right. I have great sympathy for innocent Germans of WWII not to mention today’s German school children who are taught that they are personally responsible for the holocaust but that does not mean young Israelis should have to face post colonial guilt.

I hate to see Palestinians being portrayed as saintlike by the ultra PC left simply because they are an oppressed minority.

If those young Israelis hold the same convictions as their parents, they’re just as culpable.
I’m talking about zionists, not Jews.
I know that 2 wrongs don’t make a right. I wasn’t saying that what was done to the Germans was right, I was saying the zionist Israelis will have no room to complain when the tables are turned and the media owes them no coverage, going by the history of such conflicts. I’m not even saying my attitude is “right”, I’m saying I’m fed up with these people as members of the civilized human race. I’ve written them off. Call it successful demonization, willingly embraced, with exhausted patience and tolerance.
I do not exempt the German people of the WW2 era from the crimes of the 3rd Reich. They let it happen, and knew what they supported. By the mid 30’s Germans that criticized the Nazi regime were hauled off and tortured to death with steel rods and electric drills. Yes, it started back then, not in war-torn Iraq. Every German threw the heil Hitler salute, many times a day.
I don’t think they deserved what they got after the war (or during it from the Soviets) but if you’re going to poke a leopard thru the cage bars every damn day and one day the thing gets out and mauls you, you’re not an innocent victim. Same goes for the Israelis.

German children and young adults, who had no control over what happened during WWII, ultimately paid the price for older generation Germans did. After the War, the holocaust was rarely brought up until the early sixties, when the Nazis were already starting to age and die off and younger generation Germans who were not even born or were very young during the holocaust had to bear the guilt and pay the reparations.

Same with Israelis. Most of the founders of Israel have died or are very old and while younger generation Israelis are guilty of their share of atrocities, they cannot compare to what was done by the early zionists and Israeli children are indoctrinated with a military mentality from the time they’re children. Israeli children receive IDF training in Gym class starting from Elementary school so they are very much victims of this mentality. Young Israelis may be guilty of their share of war crimes, but most don’t go into the IDF with the intention of killing innocent Palestinians. Most young Israelis serve in the IDF because it’s mandatory just as German children belonged to the Hitler Youth or fought in Hitler’s army because they were drafted. I wouldn’t liken every German who served in Hitler’s army and fought against the allied forces to those who worked in the Concentration camps and I don’t think every Israeli who has served in the IDF should be considered a war criminal.

I appreciate the time and effort of your reply, but I’m not apt to believe that the holocaust wasn’t widely known and discussed till the mid 60’s.
1000’s of American and Brit soldiers liberated the camps and saw what was going on, I’ve seen numerous contemporaneous lowell thomas newsreels of the liberation of the victims. That sort of event, unprecedented in human history and scope, does not go unembedded in the world conscienciousness.
The hardships endured and visited on the Germans lasted for some 3-5 yrs after the war. Everyone alive at that time took part in the regime’s guilt, IMO. I’m not aware of any persecution of any significance after the war..and reparations were appropriate…the German treasury stole billions, they owed it back. Much of the hidden money remains un-returned to this day, some sitting in Swiss banks. Whether later generations bear the guilt is up to them. Personally, I don’t hold them responsible and I don’t think anyone else should either. The analogy to the Israelis ends here, as it’s been stretched much further than it deserves in this exchange, IMO.
I see no difference in the Stern gang and modern settlers and IDF.
Terrorists all. I don’t consider it mitigating that Israeli kids are inculcated with hate, bigotry and ruthless intolerance. I give them (nor any other group/culture) no slack. No mulligans. Everybody, in every country, in every culture, knows instinctively the difference between right & wrong.
I’ve learned this from extensive traveling and a long, eventful life.
They may not pay any mind to the difference, but they know it.
In Israel there’s plenty refusniks. That alone negates the argument that they’re victims of their upbringing. In fact, all the people in Israel bear the same responsibility for the actions of their govt and IDF and intelligence services. It is a democracy (for Jews) with the popular vote.
They have no excuses.
I don’t consider every IDF soldier a war criminal. But alot are, and the rest aren’t refusing to serve front line or at checkpoints. The guilt gets distributed among them all, culpability is socialist.
Ever read Ward Churchills “Roosting chickens”?http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Justice_of_Roosting_Chickens

That’s pretty much how I feel.
When the Palestinians get the upper hand in Israel, and they will, the chickens will come home to roost. And I will shed no tears for the people that elected Ariel Sharon and Ben Netanyahu.

I won’t shed any tears for the Palestinians. It would be much easier to sympathize with them if the Arab world didn’t exploit their “cause” to whitewash and promote their culture and of course if ultra PC leftists didn’t use the Palestinian “cause” to further their agenda and adopted their culture.

I can sympathize with the Palestinians as individuals. It’s sad to see a child die anywhere regardless of their background. But I won’t adopt their “cause.” I can’t understand the modern fascination with the middle east among the cultural left. The keffieyeh trend, the Palestinian film festivals (which we have annually in Boston), the popularization of Arabic hip hop (which is pretty pathetic), the whitewashing of Islam by people who previously called themselves atheists, new age universalists, buddhists or pagans; none of whom would be tolerated in a radical Islamic society. They spent years railing against Western Christian society and fiercely advocating separation between church and state, sometimes going to extremes only to embrace a far less tolerant culture into their multicultural universe. It’s insane.

Well, I’m finally mystified. I don’t see how Palestinians “exploit their “cause” to whitewash and promote their culture.. and of course if ultra PC leftists didn’t use the Palestinian “cause” to further their agenda and adopted their culture.”

Ultra PC leftists? What are those?
All I’ve ever seen is Palestinains fighting to not be eradicated by Israel’s policy of ethnic cleansing and constant expansion. The Pals raise their voice against genocide and they’re just “promoting their culture? That’s frankly crazy. I mean, it’s not just delusional or “seeing things differently”..it’s crazy. It sounds like zionist-speak.
I’m sorry, but the Palestinains or any Arab state are not characterized by the tobacco road American version of snake dancing and speaking in tongues. That’s silly.
Saddam had a society that was tolerant of all religions including the shiites and Sunnis getting along with each other…equality for women…basic freedoms as long as you didn’t challenge the government (same as here really) and a secular setup.
There are gay bars in Saudi Arabia and Lebanon, I doubt you’ll find any in Israel. When gays try to march in parades in Israel they’re attacked en masse, with the police looking the other way.
But all this is incidental to the broad issue. I’ve never seen anything like the events you describe GSG. I’d like to though.
The point is the Palestinians are the underdogs and always have been. The American left supports the underdog, the downtrodden, the victims.
And let’s be clear…the Israelis are the oppressors and the Palestinians are the victims.
You seem to be wanting to cloud that up. Which leaves a bad smell, as far as I’m concerned.
I remember our good buddies, the 6 billion dollar a year Israelis, attacking American sailors in an ambush and continuing to try to kill every person on that ship for hours. Ordered by Moshe Dayan so we wouldn’t know about his illegal attack on the Golan Heights. I remember Golda Meir ordering a shootdown of a civilian airliner. And just recently, the massacre of peace activists in the flotilla crime.
But it’s the Palestinians fault? They’re “using this to whitewash their culture”?
Wow. Just……..wow.

Dano. Yes the Ultra PC leftists DO use the Palestinian cause to further their cause. The Israel/Palestine situation is a clear example of European colonization of a non white culture, they call Israel “the last apartheid state” which it is certainly not, only because it fits the traditional narrative of non whites being oppressed by whites. You don’t hear cultural marxists talking about China’s recent activity in Africa, ethnic inequality in the middle east, or tribal warfare among indigenous groups in Latin
America primarily because the atrocities are carried out by people of color. While it may have some antisemitic undertones (I am not accusing you), the singling out of Israel as the only apartheid state has less to do with antisemitism than it does with the “blame whitey game.” Cultural marxists also rarely bring up racist acts done by Sephardim and Mizrahim (who are some of the biggest racists) because they are a people of color. Sephardim are only brought into the equation when CMs want to use them as an example of white oppression, namely that the poor dark skinned Sephardim are being oppressed by those evil AshkeNAZIS. And of course if a Sephardi commits a racist act, it is only because he/she was brainwashed to do it. According to Cultural Marxists, people of color don’t have their own free will and don’t know right from wrong.

I did not say ‘Palestinians’ use their situation to whitewash or promote their culture, but the rest of the arab world does. The marketing of crappy, overpiced authentically Palestinian olive oil as well as the Keffiyeh trend was started Palestinian Solidarity activists. I don’t know where you live but in Boston we have annual Palestinian film festivals and apparently Arabic hip hop, which is a tenth rate ripoff version of Gangsta Rap is really popular in Europe right now because Europeans feel sorry for Palestinians and Iraqis not because the music has any quality. With Zionists screaming antisemitism at the very mention of Israel, Arabs seem to have adpted this tactic and accuse anyone who is critical of them of “Zionist Propoganda.” Arab leaders use the I/P situation to distract their citizens of their country’s own problems, and when people dare to criticize their governments, they are always reminded of the Palestinian situation to silence their concerns.

While Palestinians may be a victim group right now, this was not always the case, Palestinians have not been “underdogs” for all of human history and their current situation should not undermine the problems in their culture or make them immune to criticism.

The Israel/Palestine situation is a clear example of European colonization of a non white culture, they call Israel “the last apartheid state” which it is certainly not, only because it fits the traditional narrative of non whites being oppressed by whites. You don’t hear cultural marxists talking about China’s recent activity in Africa, ethnic inequality in the middle east, or tribal warfare among indigenous groups in Latin
America primarily because the atrocities are carried out by people of color. While it may have some antisemitic undertones (I am not accusing you), the singling out of Israel as the only apartheid state has less to do with antisemitism than it does with the “blame whitey game.” Cultural marxists also rarely bring up racist acts done by Sephardim and Mizrahim (who are some of the biggest racists) because they are a people of color. Sephardim are only brought into the equation when CMs want to use them as an example of white oppression, namely that the poor dark skinned Sephardim are being oppressed by those evil AshkeNAZIS. And of course if a Sephardi commits a racist act, it is only because he/she was brainwashed to do it. According to Cultural Marxists, people of color don’t have their own free will and don’t know right from wrong.

Excellent comment, GSG.

While I’m hardly a fan of Israel (due to my America first position that asserts Israel is a shitty ally and strategic liability, as well as the fact that it illuminates the hypocrisy of American Jewry), I’m no fan of Arabs or the Palestinian Solidarity Movement either.

I think for radical leftists, it is about blame whitey. You even frequently hear them refer to Israel as a white supremacist state, refer to “white zionists,” etc.

It’s because one can criticize whites. However, in this country, it’s risky to criticize Jews as Jews. Just ask Rick Sanchez.

But yes, I’ve grown increasingly wary of the pro-Palestinian movement.

I am split on the USS Liberty. They had no business travelling between two countries of war. They were just asking for trouble. It would be easy enough for an Egyptian undercover ship to wave an American flag, so I’ll forgive Israel for that.

The ship was clearly identified as a U.S. ship, and was attacked on a sunny afternoon.

But that’s besides the point.

Here’s what really bothers me. Not only did Israel not have to even apologize (can you think of any other country that could attack a U.S. ship and not even have to apologize?), but LBJ ordered potential reinforcements away and censored the survivors with threats of court-martial.

Can you think of any small, non-Jewish country that could get away with that?

Gay Area Guy
I am not defending the US government cover up or saying it was right in the first place. I simply said if you travel between countries at war, you are only asking for trouble. The US should not get involved in other country’s conflicts and avoid war zones.

This jumped out at me. What’s interesting in how you phrased that statement is that Rick Sanchez, if I remember correctly, only said that Jews aren’t persecuted victims in modern America but didn’t say anything bad about Jews. When he did criticize Stewart “as” something, it was as an upper class East coast White liberal. But I do think you were right to phrase it that way if only for the reason that most Americans (Jews and Gentiles) would indeed agree that Sanchez was “criticizing,” Jews by doubting their supposed victimhood in modern day America. Jews have made being “persecuted victims” such a part of their ethnic identity that saying they aren’t persecuted is considered insulting and anti-semitic.

BTW, when listening to the Sanchez interview, what should have been considered offensive, but of course wasn’t, was that that the Sanchez’s interlocutor said something like: “if you don’t think Jews are persecuted– try being a Jew in Nebraska.”

Lol, so it’s “offensive” to doubt that Jews are a persecuted minority, but it is okay to imply, without a shred of evidence, that average Nebraskans are bigots. And of course, what was meant by extension of “Nebraska,” was non-coastal and/or rural White Americans– the implication being that Whites not yet up to their necks in diversity not surrounded by “people of color” are bigots by default and must be cured by more migrations of darker folk.

“And of course, what was meant by extension of “Nebraska,” was non-coastal and/or rural White Americans”

Exactly, and yet these same whites vote for these shylocks and their puppets. These whites aren’t really bigoted against the jews, but maybe they should be. Jews are the cause of almost all anti-semitism.

Lol, so it’s “offensive” to doubt that Jews are a persecuted minority, but it is okay to imply, without a shred of evidence, that average Nebraskans are bigots. And of course, what was meant by extension of “Nebraska,” was non-coastal and/or rural White Americans– the implication being that Whites not yet up to their necks in diversity not surrounded by “people of color” are bigots by default and must be cured by more migrations of darker folk.

Good point.

Besides, the overwhelming majority of Jews live in places like NYC, LA, and similar urban areas. Either that, or they live in upscale suburban areas elsewhere.

I just find it fascinating how Jews are somehow still a persecuted minority.

I think Joe Sobran said it best when describing the Jewish victimhood paradox: “Hypocritical etiquette forces us to pretend that Jews are powerless victims; and if you don’t respect their victimhood, they’ll destroy you.”

Powerless victims generally don’t have the power to destroy their enemies. But alas, Jews are very, very, very powerful indeed.

I’ve been observing the conflict for 40 yrs and never once thought of it in terms of color.
I don’t see how it makes any relevant difference.
I used to think of it as religious, but I ditched that, now it’s a political struggle AFAIC.
I don’t know what a cultural Marxist is, and I’ve never met or conversed with a Marxist. I don’t equate American liberals with Marxism. I’ve been a liberal most of my life, but never a strict Marxist.
I tried to read his stuff all the way thru, but he’s a boring bastard.
Palestinian olive oil? If it sux, people won’t buy it. I know of no one who’d buy crappy olive oil or anything else because they feel empathy for a foreign cause.
Maybe the Euros like the Palestinian hip-hop cuz the Euros music is crappy. It resonates. I’ve heard traditional Arab popular music and I like it. It’s different and pleasing.
I’ve gotten into heated discussions with Palestinians and Arabs, here and in the Casbah’s of north Africa. Sure they’re defensive, so are we.
Just because they say something is Israeli propaganda, which I’ve heard many times, doesn’t mean I blindly accept it or give up the point.
Some is, some isn’t. If I know my facts, I can stand my ground.
I do not see equivalency between the degree of defensiveness of zionists and Muslims.
Saddam of course used the I/P issue to burnish his image, but since he gave stipends to the families of suicide bombers and innocent Pals who were injured and maimed in the many Israeli incursions into refugee camps, he put his money where his mouth was…he walked the walk.
He did some good.
Just because some leaders use the I/P issue to distract the masses doesn’t mean it’s either illegitimate or effective. People, including Muslims, aren’t dumb. In fact, in world travels, I’ve founf that the most politically naive people in the world are Americans, while many of the poorest, most rural Arabs seem to have a remarkable grasp of politics and reality. I’ve been amazed many times.
The situation in the M.E. right now shows that any attempt to use the I/P issue as a distraction or to keep ‘em quiet has failed.
I don’t know what you mean by saying the Palestinians haven’t been underdogs for all human history. How is this relevant to the present?
Every single group on the planet, including Buddhists, have been the bad guys at one time or another.
We’re talking about the 1920’s onward.
Hell, if u want to include the first world war they were victimized then too, betrayed after helping defeat the Germans and Turks.
It broke Lawrences mind. He loved them.
No, the zionists Israelis are analgous to Nazis. “Apartheid” doesn’t go far enuf, IMHO.
Since I know what it’s like to be on a U.S. navy ship with my shipmates burning and exploding all around me, I have empathy and anger about the USS Liberty.
6 billion a year. We give them 6 billion a year. We froze a few million that belonged to Hamas, the democratically elected govt..
It galls me.

“It’s not the Arabs who control the banks, run the media, and causing trouble globally”

Actually, arabs have quite a lot of investment capital because of the oil in their countries. I wouldn’t be surprised if they have established many of their own banks to handle it. In particular, I’m thinking of the UAE.

I’m not going by neocon propaganda. I’m going on their attacks on Byzantium and conquest of the Levant, their conquest of southern Spain and Sicily, and their attempted conquest of France. Then of course their is there slave raiding which took europeans form all over the Meditteranean and as far north as Iceland. Christendom has plenty of reasons to dislike arabs that doens’t involve their modern day terrorism and barbarism or jew propaganda.

East Asians never had much conflict with Arabs or Muslims. Just trade and mutually beneficial cultural exchange, ie. Silk Road. I though it was Ottoman Turks who constantly attacked Europe from the south, not the Arabs? And the invasions of Spain were done by Berbers I think, not Arabs. The Berbers are close to Arabs but not identical.

” I though it was Ottoman Turks who constantly attacked Europe from the south”

Arabs attacked first and managed to take Sicily and Spain, but were stopped at Tours (Pointers). They took parts of Anatolia temporarily form Byzantium, but some was recovered later. The turks finally succeeded in taking constantinople and the entire Byzantine Empire and the Balkans. A turkish vassal state, the Khanate of Crimea, was composed of the descendants of mongol invaders and attacked and enslaved people all over eastern europe.

” And the invasions of Spain were done by Berbers”

There were Berbers involved, but there were also many arabs, especially in leadership positions. They spread the arabic language and religion in Spain, so they might as well have been arabs anyway.

“Besides, the overwhelming majority of Jews live in places like NYC, LA, and similar urban areas. Either that, or they live in upscale suburban areas elsewhere.”

Yeah that’s the thing about all this anti-White ethos, the mere possibility that a nonwhite or Jew mighthypothetically be discriminated against if he were to move into a homogenous White area is “persecution,” and evidence that the area “needs” more diversity. The evidence that he might be persecuted is of course that the area is all White.

What? Doesn’t make sense? Saying that Whites in homogenous areas aren’t ipso facto racist and bigots is offensive to people of color. (it would imply that they’re tales of “discrimination,” as the reason for every failure aren’t necessarily true)

“These whites aren’t really bigoted against the jews, but maybe they should be. Jews are the cause of almost all anti-semitism.”

Yeah, at least half are Christian Zionist. Another newfound aphorism from that Colombian might be apt:
“Whoever betrays us never forgives us for his act of betrayal.”

“Wade, on balance, who would you say was worse for Europe? Mongols and other Asiatic nomads, or Arabs/Berbers?”

In more recent history I would have to say the mongols and other, if we’re counting the Ottomans despite their heavy mixture with other societies. However, it depends. Arabs were definitely harmful for Europe, as were turks. Hungarians also came in from asia though, and although they were rough in the begining, they have become a great civillzed and productive nation. As far as the modern world goes, I’m going to have to say arabs. The only places asiatic hordes are a threat is Turkey and most european countries, barring Britain, know the low down on them. As we’ve seen from Russian skinheads lately, the Russian route for central asian barbarians is going to be blocked off pretty well. The real problem in the east might be from Russia itself in the form of Eurasianism. Eurasianism is a philosophy which sees the steppe stretching from eastern europe into asia as it’s own cultural continent. Many are very anti-western.

Can you blame Russians for being “anti-Western”? Anglo-Jewry has been the most consistent enemy of Russians and Slavs in general, stretching from Tsarist times to the Cold War. That’s why I view the Eastern Front as tragic: the Germans and Russians should have kept the Non-Aggression Pact and march west against the plutocrats. And of course, NATO is a continuing threat to Russia.

“Anglo-Jewry has been the most consistent enemy of Russians and Slavs in general, stretching from Tsarist times to the Cold War”

Yeah, and before that they fought Khazars, Pechenegs, Crimean Tatars, and a whole bunch of other turkic peoples, Mongols, and, most recently, several wars with the Ottoman Turks.

“the Germans and Russians should have kept the Non-Aggression Pact ”

German-Russian realtions have sure not been a cake walk. Starting with the Teutonic Nights and ending (for now) with WWII/Cold War, the german-russian relationship has been quite treacherous. The same could be said for Polish-Russian relations for a long time. This is the fault of both. Pretending the Russians are innocent is like pretending that Britain is innocent.

Wade, who would you say is more responsible for the Eastern Front war, Germany or the USSR? Hitler gave a speech in November 1939 in which he said “During the last great war, the plutocratic gentlemen (Britain, France) watched us and the Russians bleed each other dry. I have endeavored to not do them the favour this time, which is why I came to an agreement with the Russians. The Non-Aggression Pact represents the victory of reason.” I was paraphrasing, but that was Hitler’s general message. What do you think made him change his mind and invade on June 1941? Did he think Stalin’s purges didn’t go far enough and the USSR was still Judaicized? If Hitler didn’t invade, many scholars believe that both the USSR and Germany could have ruled Europe together to this day, with the disgusting Anglo-Jews on the sidelines. That would’be been great…

“Wade, who would you say is more responsible for the Eastern Front war, Germany or the USSR?”

The way I understand it Stalin was completely surprised and the Soviet Union was unprepared. I think the blame must go with Hitler.

“That would’be been great…”

No, it wouldn’t have. Nazism and communism are horrible philosophies ofter put in place by total sociopaths. They did much damage to the culture of those areas.

Don’t think that these countries would be so great to East Asia either. Germany was a colonial power in Chinese port cities. They were in a town called Tsingtao where they started brewing beer. Some even say it was Kaiser Wilhem who coined the term “Yellow Peril”.

The Russians had a long history of being bad to east asians. Of course, Russia annexed all of northeast asia. (In their defense, Britain was about to. When the Russians got to location of Vladivostok the British had already named some of the bays and inlets.) Russia also tried to annex Manchuria and dominate Korea, but the Japs beat the crap out of them. During the Civil War, on russian baron actually invaded Mongolia and tried to found an empire in East Asia.(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Ungern_von_Sternberg)
Later of course, the russians took the Kuril Islands form Japan and still hasn’t given them back. Of course, one can not forget the humiliating Treaty of Aigun where Russia took a large swath of Chinese land.

Imperial Germany did control some port cities in China, but that was nothing compared to te British scum, with humiliation of the Opium War and economically strangling China. The Third Reich actually wanted to help Chiang Kai-Shek industrialize China and sent military advisors to Nationalist China to train KMT troops. After 1937, Germany of couse sided with Japan. The USSR helped China industrialize in the 1950s. Why would you expect the USSR to be kind to Japan, which was an Axis country? From a Chinese (and East Asian) point of view, Germany and Russia are much better than the Judaicized Anglo pricks.

” Why would you expect the USSR to be kind to Japan, which was an Axis country?”

Russia was doing shit in East Asia long before WWII.

Germany is better. I’m no expert on German history, but I think that Nazism was an abberation. The only other real horrible organized thing I know they’ve done was when the put down a rebellion in Namibia. Germans have been great not only in sciences, but in cultural studies as well. They have been involved in many archaeological investigations and other cultural activities outside of Germany. Also, Germany’s geography makes it for the most part irrelevant in this region, especially if it’s neighbors don’t want it there.

Where did you get the impression that I was pro-Imperial Japan? I’m sort of ambivalent on Imperial Japan. Yes, I’m Korean, so I’m aware of all the things you mentioned. By the way, did you take a course on Korean history? But there general goal was to kick the Anglo-Jew imperialists out of the Pacific in favor of a pan-Asian order. That is a goal which I agree with wholeheartedly, although Nanking Massacre etc., were horrendous. Of couse, the fact that they allied with Germany makes me less hostile toward them than I would be otherwise. So all in all, I’m ambivalent on fascist Japan.

I mean, sure, Japan rhetorically called for pan-Asian unity, but I wouldn’t call its actions towards its fellow Asians solidarity. Not by a long shot. It was just propaganda.

Kind of similar to how Hitler rhetorically used the Jewish-Arab conflict in Palestine to rail against British imperialism in order to score propaganda points. Did Hitler have love for the Arabs? No. But he used the conflict as an opportunity to bash his enemies.

With regards to the Germany-Japan alliance. That really didn’t amount to much. I guess the one thing that Japan got out of it was an easy annexation of French-controlled Indochina, due to the fact that Germany controlled France, and could tell them to cede territory to Japan.

I wish I had the answers to numerous hypothetical historical questions. Although, in spite of the anti-war attitudes of Americans, the media and hollywood were conducting campaigns designed to garner support for war, and FDR wanted war.

The U.S. was already embargoing Japan and pushing it towards confrontation.